No Solar Roadways Anytime Soon

News & Current Events Public News & Current Events
,
21

Way to take a dump on a promising idea fellas.  It's not that I don't agree with some of the points that were made, but seriously how about trying to look at it from an optimistic viewpoint.  Instead of thinking of ways that the project could fail and therefore isn't worth troubleshooting, how about thinking in terms of problems that need solving.  I see a lot of "Why don't we just put Solar Panels on rooftops?"  Yeah, I agree.  Why don't we?  But that doesn't mean we should altogether abandon Solar Roadway concepts altogether.  I don't think we would have to do one or the other.
(1) "solar panels are barely economic when set up perfectly. That involves orienting them properly to the south (for maximum sun exposure) and tilting them just so."

The first part of this point has already been addressed above by Kman.  In addition, I don't think the point of the Solar Roadways is to produce more efficient energy than other Solar forms such as rooftops (which we can still do).  I think the point is that this idea that is worth exploring ties together multiple industries in one, not the least of which is making powerlines obsolete which solves numerous problems and issues that our society needs to maintain and address daily.  And instead of having concrete roads that just sit there, these would perform a function on top of being used to be driven on while also providing a place for electrical/network wiring.  

 

(2) "…solar panels perform exceptionally poorly when they're blocked in any way (by leaves, shadows, etc) and their performance degrades when covered with dirt, grime, or snow."

Thankyou Captain Obvious.  There's going to be cars driving across these panels!  It's not like these panels would be expected to be getting 100% of the sun anyway.  Plus, surely the money that we're already spending on powerline maintenance and Snow Blowers could be diverted to finding a solution to debris.  What about some kind of built-in automated vauccum system (where gutters would be?) that detects such objects and sucks/pulls them away to the side when there's no traffic?  I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud.  Maybe that's a dumb idea.  Certainly an engineer could come up with something cost effective.  We already have Google Cars on the way that drive themselves, how about an automated Car/Bus system that has a vaccuum system on its under carriage specifically for this purpose!? Hell, it could serve more than one purpose!  It could also be a means of FREE Public Transportation!!  We could also have "Citizen Highway Cleaning" programs where people can be rewarded for spending a couple hours a week for cleaning up a part of the highway close to their home or office. These ideas may seem expensive but we're already paying to have these roads repaved and powerlines maintained and snow cleaned off.  On top of all of it we're paying massive amounts of our paychecks to unsustainable dirty energy that is manipulated daily by the likes of JP Morgan, plus the cost of having to fill up our gas tanks weekly (some daily) which everybody already knows the cost of, not to mention the hidden costs of Multi Trillion dollar wars for oil resources in the middle east plus the hidden cost of our lives!  So in the grand scheme of things, once we're closer to society driving mostly electric cars and using more and more alternative energy sources, we're talking like $300 a person per month no longer needed for that, plus the labor force and materials needed for creating traditional energy sources would be freed up for the market.  And if we're really so concerned with issues of shade obstructing the sun, how about we start with roads or sidewalks that have no trees over them and see what kind of progress we can make from that starting point??

(3) "This will create a rough ride, and eventually end up tearing apart whatever electrical connections link them together."

I don't think we can say this with absolute certainty.  And even if we could, it's not like bright minds couldn't brainstorm to find a solution.

(4) "Thick tempered glass is not cheap to produce, "

Advancements in nanotech could very well remove this barrier within several years time.

 

All in all A+ for coming up with problems that will likley need to be solved.  F- for addressing them pessimistically as if we absolutely cannot find cost effective solutions for them.  Maybe I'm wrong.  Maybe these guys are just out to steal everyone's money for a completely bad idea.  But I think it's too early to say that. 

 

 

22

[quote=davefairtex]At $5.6/watt, costs to install a 2.4 kw system is about $13.5k w/o incentives, and it generates $720/year in electricity, that's a 5.3% return on investment per year, for the next 25 years.  Try getting that at a bank.  Oh yeah, that's a tax-free ROI too.
[/quote]
My expected returns are about in that ballpark.
We only have 3.8 hours per day of insolation (averaged across year) here in MA, so my returns are worse than places where you can count on 6, but here's what I get.  Also, I held the current cost of electricity constant.
5.1% is the expected rate of annual return without incentives.
7.3% is the expected rate of annual return with current incentives.
In this environment, those are pretty good returns.

23

I really agree with you that we will be going back to 'current' solar energy, it is the trend for our future.  Also I strongly agree with you that 'local food' is one of the most urgent pressing big keys to our energy issues.  Permaculture is a word I didn't even really know much about even just a few months ago; that changing for me.  Personally all my other 'energy' thoughts, ideas, and projects have taken second stage to my gardening efforts over the last year and a half (the time I committed to myself to change things I can control).  Once I have my local yard food system built to a higher level, I will go on to some other energy issues i can control, like solar panels on a roof.     

24

In CA, where solar has been around for some time and there are a lot of solar contractors, cash prices are going to be less than $4/W DC in most cases.  Premium panels, Enphase micro-inverters (love them) and ground mount systems will add to that cost.  We would make a fortune if we could charge $5.60/W DC, but competition has a funny way of not making that work out very well.We generally do not install systems smaller than 3 kW DC and typical are closer to 5-6 kW.  Under 3 KW the economics are tougher as the fixed costs (design, permit fees, monitoring, mobilization) drive the price/W up.  Those who chose systems less than 3 kW in CA are generally motivated by doing the green thing and not economics.  The reality is that 98% of customers go solar for economics, going green is a side benefit.
Another big plus in CA are the net metering laws that allow production that is sent back to the grid to be credited at retail rates.  This recently has been grandfathered for 20 years.  Many customers elect to use time of use rates.  This means that during peak hours (1-7 pm) rates are much higher than rest of the day.  The solar system produces a lot of power during this time.  So this often enables systems sized to offset 70% of annual kwhr usage to reduce the electric bill by almost 100% (there are meter fees that can not be offset).
So, in CA typical cash solar systems will see 15% ROI in the first year.  Following years see improved ROI if assume the next 20 years are like the last 20 yrs that saw PG&E rates rise on average by 6%/yr.
As a side note, I would say that about 5% of our customers are open to the concepts of the crash course and its pretty clear who they are up front.  The other 95% are the typical population and unfortunately if brought up the crash course would probably cost us deals.  So we do our best to install as much solar as we can using the last 20 years as the guide since that is what customers are comfortable with.
Kman

25

A few comments.I use time of use and annual billing tariffs for my PG&E supplied electricity. I have only a 2.5 KW system and this supplies all the electricity my wife and I need based on net costs. My panels face west because I want afternoon sun to maximize the value of my generated power. I generate power during the high cost part of the day and use power during the low cost part of the day. I live on the foggy central California coast, far from the sunny desert.
As noted  above, PG&E is trying to change the tariff structure and if they succeed, I may find the economics changed. Currently (pun intended) I pay only the $6 per month connection fee. My electric bill is running about $-100 per year. PG&E doesn't pay me the $100 so they should be happy having me as a customer.
I have installed several energy saving devices such as LED lights, skylights, etc.
My wife and I do drive but not so much since we are both retired. I would like to have an all electric car but due to my age it probably won't happen.
On that topic, however, I would like to recommend looking into PRT, Personal Rapid Transit. It fits nicely into the Solar Roadway topic. The idea is to provide public transportation using 2 to 4 seat electric vehicles running on an elevated track, computer controlled to allow for close separation when needed and parked when not needed. The tracks could be located such that most folks in urban / suburban areas have a station within one half mile of their homes.
The track could have solar panels overhead to supply all or most of the power needed for the cars, so transmission losses could be minimized. Test tracks have been built to test the concepts but there is a big blowback from the auto industry, as expected. This concept is an example of what could be done if energy efficiency were to become a critical issue. The idea has been around for several decades but it does step on a few toes and has not been tried on a citywide basis. Every new idea has drawbacks and needs to be thoroughly tested and improved upon.
Dennis Paull

26

DaveOne of my favorite Dilberts as well!  I was designing cellular handsets for Motorola in 1994 when this came out, and it instantly showed up in about every engineer's office, as it seemed to represent our typical conversation with marketing (especially the telepathic human interface detail)!
But, back to the SOLAR FREAKIN ROADWAYS, I wonder if part of the explanation for the extensive crowd funding response is just another indication of how investors are getting desperate to find ANYTHING that might give them a return on their money these days.
Best,
Keith

27

[quote=KeithM1116]But, back to the SOLAR FREAKIN ROADWAYS, I wonder if part of the explanation for the extensive crowd funding response is just another indication of how investors are getting desperate to find ANYTHING that might give them a return on their money these days.
[/quote]
Keith, I take it more as an indication that people are looking for something to be hopeful about and a technological miracle is usually at the top of the list.
Note that the solar roadways is a crowdfunding effort so returns are not even part of the game.  People donated and that's that.
I see in the defender's list of complaints about pointing out the realities of the project very little in the way of actual, well thought out factual counterclaims.
Many simply say, this is a great idea and I like it and I don't like that you are raining on it!
Fair enough, because I tend not to give much leeway to sloppy ideas and I could be more sensitive to the fact that people are growing desperate for solutions about which they can feel good, or at least better.  But I do feel that false hope is more harmful than helpful.
And it's true that a lot of working things today began as somebody's whacky idea, but some ideas just should not be combined, like flying submarines or combo freezer grills.
Roads and solar are another such combination and I really find it troubling that so many people have been taken with 'brilliance' of this concept.  That this is just an inane mash-ups of ideas seems so obvious to me, and now I wonder how the less obvious predicaments we face can be effectively communicated and promoted?  It's troubling really.

28

Moving a ton to move a person on highways is the problem. The defect is the highway network.
JPods networks suspend 500 pound vehicles from overhead rails. Removing the parasitic mass of the vehicle and the repetitive start-stop of highway traffic cuts energy requirements by 90%, converts 90% of highly repetitive urban transport costs to profits/competitive advantage.
Solar collectors mounted over the rails gather mover than 25,000 vehicle-miles of power per mile per day. The 10x transport benefits are combined with the 6x Net Energy of solar over oil as transport fuel (20:1 for solar versus 3:1 for fracked/sand).

http://vimeo.com/87069041

Secaucus, NJ and Linyi, China are moving forward to build JPods networks in 2014.

29

Almost all the objections to solar energy take the same position. At current levels of efficiency, they are not really cost effective. Apply that to the 1990 personal computer, or mobile phone and you see that it is not a valid objection.
True, my home is not a good candidate for the current panels. My home's structure is not strong enough for the weight of today's panels, and I would have to ge rid of the trees that currently serve to cool the house. I have seen plastic cloth photovoltaic units. There is much out there that will improve quickly once it gets going.

Back to the roads, What if we started with driveways and parking lots? How about sidewalks? How about smaller applications leading to larger?

I believe in solar. I believe in the energy independence it offers. I believe that much of the objection is big corporate power resisting the potential for independence that solar promises. Next time you think of how impossible it is, look at your cell phone. That was impossible in the 80's.

30

[quote=Norascats]Almost all the objections to solar energy take the same position. At current levels of efficiency, they are not really cost effective. Apply that to the 1990 personal computer, or mobile phone and you see that it is not a valid objection.
True, my home is not a good candidate for the current panels. My home's structure is not strong enough for the weight of today's panels, and I would have to ge rid of the trees that currently serve to cool the house. I have seen plastic cloth photovoltaic units. There is much out there that will improve quickly once it gets going.
Back to the roads, What if we started with driveways and parking lots? How about sidewalks? How about smaller applications leading to larger?
I believe in solar. I believe in the energy independence it offers. I believe that much of the objection is big corporate power resisting the potential for independence that solar promises. Next time you think of how impossible it is, look at your cell phone. That was impossible in the 80's.
[/quote]
Nora, thank you for making the point about the difference between impractical and impossible.  I never said that solar roadways were impossible, only that they are very impractical.
As you noted, your own house is an impractical location for solar panels, but it's not impossible.  You could put them on your land, not cut any trees, and receive a perfectly horrid return for your efforts.  
The same would be true for roadways for all of the reasons I laid out.  If you want to debate those, on their merits, I am all ears.  Do you have a solution for the poor orientation issue?   How about the thick glass being a lousy transmitter of photons?  What about glass being actually quite soft and that it would wear down quickly and become cloudy (like the surface of sea glass) due to the grinding effects of heavy tires, feet etc coupled with grit?  Or how about the most important one which is that such roadways will be massively more expensive than either traditional roads or conventional solar?
However, to say that such questions are just naysaying, or that somebody will figure all that out, is simply avoiding the dialog.  
I know bad ideas when I hear them and solar roadways is a very bad idea.  There are many reasons why even beyond the ones I've mentioned.  
But it's not impossible.  We could build them, but would you support an enormous tax increase to pay for their installation and maintenance?  If not, how do you propose to pay for them?
Not every idea is a good one, and solar roadways really needed to be vetted by some experienced engineers before it even got this far.   It's horribly impractical, but I will concede it's not impossible.
If we cannot expose bad ideas without somehow raining on the whole solar parade, then we're not going to get anywhere quickly and I don't think we have the luxury of handing out trophies to all participants.  
The essence of good business is knowing when you've got a losing proposition on your hands and dumping it quickly.  Learn fast and move on.
I, for one, would not invest a penny with this company, nor would I front you the money the put solar at your location for a cut of the revenue stream.  Impractical is impractical.  Luckily there are a lot of very interesting ideas out there that are very good and make sense.  That's where we should be putting our efforts.

31
I believe in solar. I believe in the energy independence it offers. I believe that much of the objection is big corporate power resisting the potential for independence that solar promises. Next time you think of how impossible it is, look at your cell phone. That was impossible in the 80's.
We have roads.  We want to replace them with panels that generate electricity.  Will the panels be cheaper than the roads are today when the electricity generated is factored in?  If so, panels might have a chance.

It would surprise me if asphalt ends up being more expensive than a roadway panel.  In some sense, it boils down to price - like with everything.  After all, we need oil, Jupiter's moon Titan has a lot of it, why not just send a spacecraft to go and fetch it back to earth?  Duh.  Go to where the oil is!

Ah right.  Cost of spaceship + transport exceeds the benefit from the oil retrieved.  One billion dolllars a barrel is oil that really is just too expensive.

My gut tells me, roadways won't fly economically with our current materials.  Roadway panels are likely to be - and remain - substantially more expensive than asphalt, even assuming they are made durable enough to survive, since I don't think they will be able to generate enough electricity to make up for their higher cost.  And - moore's law won't help solve that issue.

It all boils down to EROEI, and what sort of problem we're facing.

The power of your phone is all about moore's law.  If automobile development & engineering physics were subject to moore's law, we'd be driving around at a million miles an hour.  Of course, they aren't - and we're driving at much the same speed we have been for the past 90 years, even with our fancy new phones.

Is a roadway panel more like a car problem, or a CPU/phone problem?  If its like a phone, and it just needs a smaller and faster CPU, then moore's law will help you out and your logic applies.  Unfortunately, I think its more like the car problem, where moore's doubling effect doesn't apply.

 

32

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/06/13/investors-see-bright-future-for-solar-firm-are-they-blinded-light/0O6fTWI8HA06OmxUndiNqJ/story.html
I guess people will have to try this to realize how dumb it is…

33

Here in UK, we are looking at £1 per Watt installed for larger systems (£1.40 for domestic-sized installations). Across the country we get between 800 and 1200 hours equivalent per year, ie, about 1kWh/y per installed Watt. If the installation lasts about 20 years, that is approx 5p per kWh without factoring in any subsidies or sales. That is cheaper than most of the electricity tariffs available. (Standard domestic tariffs are three times this at the moment and rising every year.)(Even factoring in complexities like performance degradation and inverter replacement still gives a reasonable price per kWh.)
The EROEI calculations are important but my understanding is that these are improving due to the scale of manufacturing mainly.
For your own system, 12 years payback (which is longer than we typically calculate here in UK with current subsidies) means 8% ROI, which is better all but the riskiest of investments and well worth doing on so many levels.

34

ChrisI agree that this whole lack of critical thinking, or the ability to logically analyze the viability of basic concepts in our current society is very troubling. I think this Solar Roadways example is just a case in point.  I blame our educational systems that don't seem to be generating adults that can analyze and apply logic to issues, and the popular media.  What passes for "investigative journalism" these days typically amounts to writers that take a company's press release, or a politician's statement and just regurgitate, oftentimes with such a high extent of plagiarism that our old high school rhetoric teachers would have given us all zeroes if we handed in such an assignment.
I remember when I was young that every time my father got in a conversation with his friends they typically attacked "all the world's problems" on a very analytical and in depth basis.  And my dad was a farmer that never graduated from high school.  BUT, he read the newspapers and magazines at the time and was SO much better informed that most of our society these days.
I don't know what it will take to change this.  Perhaps as more people search the internet for informational sites such as this will help us, but I'm really afraid that students are not being infused with the desire or ability to do such investigations, and to reason out their positions on their own.
And this is what I find to be extremely troubling.

35

Article I wrote:
http://www.manufacturing.net/blogs/2013/08/engineering-american-energy-independence

Do Fischer-Tropsch in Mexico.  Coal from Kentucky and Alaska. Finance by state initatives rather than national policy.  So a tiny handful of people can set energy policy.  Create our gasoline and diesel in Mexico outside US law suits and control

We can drive down the cost of energy to close to zero so that the value of the dollar shoots through the roof.  Social media means we can write out own laws at the state level at next to no cost.

 

Space based solar is super easy and launch cost goes to zero using railgun technology developed for the US Navy.  Engineering already done to use railguns for space launchers.

http://research.lifeboat.com/ieee.em.pdf

 

Engineering has been done on space based solar.

http://www.nrl.navy.mil/media/news-releases/2014/solar-power-when-its-raining-nrl-builds-space-satellite-module-to-try

Ideal solar panel material is graphene.  One pound creates 500 football fields of solar collectors - multiple electrons per photon.

Bring water to Mexico as well.  Build up middle class there and destroy frug cartels.

 

Here’s a summary of the key points I want to make if I can meet Raul Labrador:



1. have America become energy independent via action at the state level by initiative

 overview of the science

http://www.manufacturing.net/blogs/2013/08/engineering-american-energy-independence



2.  Solve the drought in the SW USA

    water + coal slurry processed in FT plants in Mexico, Central Valley farmers to spearhead political action



3. Defeat the EPA in their war on coal

   barge coal and water slurry from Kentucky down the Ohio and Mississippi to FT plants in Mexico, finance by state initiative



4. Solve the immigration

   create a jobs magnet in Mexico for very high paying middle class jobs, illegal alien Mexicans who vote Democrat return home 

   to better jobs there than the have in the USA.  They prefer their culture to ours.



5.  Solve the problem of flow of drugs into America over our southern border

    a strong middle class in Mexico means they won’t look to the danger of the drug trade for income, bring in former Navy

    Seals to provide security and overpower the drug cartels ability to wage terrorism on the culture,  Last Battle of the Old West - 

    Magnificent Seven



6. Create a combination research centers, golf course retirement communities and water efficient farms all over Northern Mexico 

   and all of Baja California - water and energy enabling the process.  Central valley farmers supplying the know-how on farming



Water and energy powers all of this.



This is enough fresh water in NW Canada and Alaska flowing into the ocean every second to irrigate 37 states in the USA and all of Mexico.  Pipelines are subject to lawsuit.  So we barge the water coal combination to Mexico so we are outside the lawsuits.  The FT process produces drop-in fuels of diesel and gasoline as well as electricity.  The CO2 can be dealt with in a number of methods.



We also want to offer crowd-funding at the pump (pumps have digital options) as an option so that greens can finance renewable alternatives. 



Gasoline moves to $1.99/gallon for the next 500 years or until displaced altogether by renewables.

36

Seeing this many gullible people investing so heavily in bad ideas has made me decide to start a new business of my own.  I am going to offer an online email and file shredding and recycling service.  If you have confidential emails or files you want destroyed, just forward them to me with payment of $1 per megabyte and I will not only destroy them using the latest software but I will email you a certificate showing that 100% of the bits were recycled :slight_smile:

37

In my area, power produced through the sun will be very ideal. Well I am speaking of a simple home in a tropical country. However, the costs really is not that practical. So even if we opt to go for Solar, we still have challenges to face.

38

A little update on the first "major" installation of Solar FREAKIN' Roadways!!!

Get those darn kids off the solar bike lane! They're blocking the sun! They're standing on US$ 3.7 million of photovoltaics and precast concrete bike lane, running all of 230 feet, that's going to generate enough energy to supply enough electricity for three houses!

© Solaroad via twitter

Now I don't want to rain on anyone's bicycle parade, but all of the complaints that we had with Scott Brusaw's solar roadway project apply here in spades. The Solaroad people, who built this bike lane in Krommenie, near Amsterdam, admit that because of the angle (lying almost flat), these solar panels will only generate 30% of what a conventional roof mounted panel would produces.

http://www.treehugger.com/solar-technology/solaroad-opens-first-solar-bike-path.html